Steep Essay ยท A thinker portrait

The Lens Turner: on rotating what you are given

You rotate things until a different face appears.

Most people accept the shape a problem arrives in. They take the question as asked and then they answer it. The lens turner has a different reflex. Before the answer comes, they ask: is this actually the question. Or is this the question dressed up. Or is this a worse question hiding a better one. The rotation begins before the answer does, and half the time the rotation is the answer.

This is not contrarianism. Contrarianism is arguing against every position, reflexively, for the pleasure of friction. The lens turner does something else. They turn the object, slowly, until a face appears that the first description had hidden. Sometimes the new face agrees with the old one. Sometimes it reveals that the argument was taking place on the wrong axis. Either way, the turning is the work.

What fuels it is a small, specific irritation: the feeling that most arguments are conducted without anyone having first asked whether the terms are the right terms. Once you notice this, you cannot unnotice it. You start hearing it in meetings, in conversations, in your own head when you are about to reach for a familiar answer. The lens turner is the person who pauses and says "wait, what if it's actually the opposite", and half the time, quietly, it is.

What this looks like day to day

It looks like rewording questions before you answer them. A friend asks "how do I stop procrastinating" and you notice, even before you open your mouth, that the word "stop" is the problem. You end up asking them what they are actually afraid of, and the conversation goes somewhere neither of you planned.

It looks like finishing a book you loved and then immediately reading a book that argues against it. Not because you doubted the first book. Because you want to see the first book from the other side. Reading two opposing positions in sequence is how you find out where you actually stand, which is almost never exactly on either.

It looks like a meeting where the room has agreed on a path and you say "before we commit, what would we do if the opposite were true." Sometimes this lands and the room rethinks. Sometimes you are the person who slowed the meeting down for no reason. Both are acceptable costs. You cannot tell in advance which one you are doing.

It looks like watching a fight between two colleagues and seeing, clearly, that they are not actually disagreeing. They are using the same word for two different things. You end up as the translator, although you did not ask for the job, and the translator is always the person both sides end up frustrated with later.

It looks like a quiet distaste for slogans. Not because slogans are bad. Because a slogan is a position that has been stripped of the rotations that would have made it interesting. The lens turner wants the rotations. Preferably before the slogan got written.

The shadow side

The rotation is not free. Every turn takes time.

The lens turner, at their worst, cannot stop turning. A question that could have been answered in a sentence becomes a thirty-minute exercise in which every possible reframing is aired. The person who asked the question leaves exhausted. They came for an answer. They got an epistemology. The lens turner can confuse their own process for the other person's need.

The lens turner also mistakes every reframe for progress. Some reframes are real. A question that was asked badly becomes tractable when asked better. Other reframes are just evasions. "What if we flipped the question" is sometimes a way of dodging the question. The lens turner, caught in the rotation, does not always notice which kind of move they are making. Their friends do, eventually.

The third shadow is arrogance, and it is quiet. The lens turner can develop a private belief that everyone else is taking the question at face value while they, the rotator, are seeing it clearly. This is often wrong. Many other people also rotate. They just do it silently. The lens turner, mistaking their own visible process for uncommon insight, occasionally becomes insufferable.

Who they remind us of

Richard Feynman taught physics by taking a problem and turning it until a different angle was visible. His trick was not knowing more than the other physicists. It was that he would not accept the problem as given. He would restate it, inside out, in kitchen-table language, until the restating revealed the mechanism. The restating was the insight.

Susan Sontag took the artefacts of the twentieth century and held them up to new lights. On Photography is a sequence of rotations, each one finding a face the previous essay had missed. She did not settle on a position. She turned the subject until you understood it was too dense to settle on.

Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman built a career on one question: what happens when you change the frame without changing the facts. Their work is the lens turner's textbook. They showed that the frame is almost always doing half the work, and that most confident positions are positions about the frame the holder has not yet noticed.

Pauline Kael reviewed films by refusing to review the film the critics were reviewing. She would arrive at a consensus take and then write past it, not against it, but around it, until the subject looked different.

David Foster Wallace's "This Is Water" speech is the lens turner in five-minute form. Two fish swim past a third who asks how the water is, and the two fish eventually ask each other: what the hell is water. That moment of not accepting your own frame is the lens turner's whole life.

Further reading


Take the quiz and see whether this is your shape, or which of the other five is.

Take the 2-minute quizDownload Steep

Other portraits